Destination Persian Gulf? US nuclear sub and destroyer enter Red Sea

page: 2
7
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 08:49 AM
link   
Unfortunately,ANYTIME the US moves ships around,or troops around,its an impending INVASION.

RT is State ran,and State owned I believe......................





posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 08:58 AM
link   
One sub?

Apparently the OP is not aware of how the US navy operates. Since there is supposedly 3 Aircraft carriers already in the area or on the way, there would be a minimum of 3 subs with those groups and most likely 6 or more.

You see, when we send a carrier, it always includes at least one sub with the carrier group and usually two. One preceeding the group and another usually behind it. Then, because tensions are "supposedly" high in the area, it's most likely a couple subs were/are already in the area to keep an eye on things/first deterent with their cruise missile/nuclear capibilties.

So in total, you're looking at probably 8-10 subs within striking range of Iran.
edit on 31-1-2012 by freedom12 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 08:59 AM
link   
reply to post by sonnny1
 




RT is State ran,and State owned I believe......................

Just like Fox News, CNN, MSNBC and CNBC.

All parrots of the US government.
edit on 31-1-2012 by Vitchilo because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 09:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by freedom12
One sub?

Apparently the OP is not aware of how the US navy operates. Since there is supposeedly 3 Aircraft carriers alrady in the area or on the way, there would be a minimum of 3 subs with those groups and most likely 6 or more.

You see, when we send a carrier, it always includes at least one sub with the carrier group and usually two. One preceeding the group and another usually behind it. Then, because tensions are "supposedly" high in the area, it's most likely a couple subs were/are already in the area to keep an eye on things/first deterent with their cruise missile/nuclear capibilties.

So in total, you're looking at probably 8-10 subs within striking range of Iran.


The OP posted a link to a story about this one sub. What didn't you understand?



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 09:05 AM
link   
reply to post by Hellas
 

Oh, I understood perfectly what the OP is saying sir.

Just pointing out the OP is making mention of ONE sub as a big deal, when in all likelyhood, many SUB's are already on station.
edit on 31-1-2012 by freedom12 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 09:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by Vitchilo
reply to post by sonnny1
 




RT is State ran,and State owned I believe......................

Just like Fox News, CNN, MSNBC and CNBC.

All parrots of the US government.
edit on 31-1-2012 by Vitchilo because: (no reason given)




Touche !

I should have said Putin owned an Ran...........




posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 09:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by freedom12
reply to post by Hellas
 

Oh, I understood perfectly what the OP is saying sir.

Just pointing out the OP is making mention of ONE sub as a big deal, when in all likelyhood, many SUB's are already on station.
edit on 31-1-2012 by freedom12 because: (no reason given)


Which only makes his case stronger, since it shows an even heavier presence in the area.

Just saying...



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 09:26 AM
link   
reply to post by Tifozi
 

Just trying to help the OP out with the "facts".

But hey, what's one more war-mongering thread on ATS? Just add it to the already 2 dozen plus existing threads here.


Make every thread count!!



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 09:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by freedom12
One sub?

Apparently the OP is not aware of how the US navy operates. Since there is supposeedly 3 Aircraft carriers alrady in the area or on the way, there would be a minimum of 3 subs with those groups and most likely 6 or more.

You see, when we send a carrier, it always includes at least one sub with the carrier group and usually two. One preceeding the group and another usually behind it. Then, because tensions are "supposedly" high in the area, it's most likely a couple subs were/are already in the area to keep an eye on things/first deterent with their cruise missile/nuclear capibilties.

So in total, you're looking at probably 8-10 subs within striking range of Iran.


I thank you for attempting to enlighten the the author of this thread as well as many of the posters, (I attempted to relay a similar message in my post) but sadly, our posts are probably just exercises in futility. There are many people here on ATS who feel it's their duty to make mountains out of mole hills and I doubt that reality will have little, if any effect on them.

Just like those who immediately assume that marshall law is just around the corner because they see "miles and miles of tanks" sitting on railcars in their area. Had these people been paying attention when Bush lied us into that war, they would have seen "miles and miles of tanks" on railroad cars being transported from their home bases to various U.S. seaports for shipment overseas. Common sense would dictate that we could expect the same scenario in reverse as our troops return home.

Not to mention those tanks now being transported to repair & refurbishment facilities. But to hear these people tell it, it's time for us to begin lining up at the FEMA camp gates if we want to get first dibs on the bottom bunk.


To some people, the fact that they just found out about something, means it's the first time it ever happened and it must spell doom. Hopefully, once they find out that the U.S. and Iran are not the only ones with subs in the Persian Gulf, they'll probably lock themselves up in their bomb shelters never to be heard from again.
edit on 31-1-2012 by Flatfish because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 09:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by freedom12
reply to post by Tifozi
 

Just trying to help the OP out with the "facts".

But hey, what's one more war-mongering thread on ATS? Just add it to the already 2 dozen plus existing threads here.


Make every thread count!!


Don't take this as an attack, nor anything similar...

..but I honestly don't understand the need to call people warmongers and whatnot just because they are discussing this issues.

Clearly you misjudged me and many posters here if you think that's the case. Being aware of what's going on in the world, and doing some speculation isn't harmful. Much the opposite, it's good to see people debating and having an idea of what makes the world tick.

If "one more war-mongering thread" bothers you, why are you in ATS? Aren't you aware this is a conspiracy site? This whole thing works around the idea of the debate and discussion of ideas outside the box, and some end up being false, some end up being true.

If this makes a turn for the worst, at least there is a group of people who saw this sh!t coming, wether it happens or not.

I just don't comprehend this idea of people saying "calm down, there's nothing to see here". Clearly, you have not seen the parts of the world I have. Besides, isn't this what news reporters and analysts do? Read a piece of news and speculate?...

Unless, you made those comments assuming we are a bunch of mentally ill people that see paranoia in every angle... If that's the case, then it's not worth saying much, isn't it?
edit on 31/1/12 by Tifozi because: typo



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 09:38 AM
link   
reply to post by Flatfish
 

Star for you. I didn't read the whole thread or I woulda seen you bascially posted the same as me at the bottom of page 1.

Apparently the guy below your latest post disagree's with our comments and think he's "up-to-date" now, because he read this thread.

(Smacks palm to head) Why do I even bother sometimes?





If "one more war-mongering thread" bothers you, why are you in ATS?


In the vain HOPE that this site wouldn't have turned into GLP. Guess my wish has failed!


edit on 31-1-2012 by freedom12 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 09:48 AM
link   
reply to post by freedom12
 


Are you serious?

I started my post by saying "do not take this as an attack", and that's how you respond? At least have the courtesy of using my name when referring to me. You know, it's called respect, something you apparently have no concept...


Apparently the guy below your latest post disagree's with our comments and think he's "up-to-date" now, because he read this thread.


"the guy" doesn't think "he's up-to-date". "the guy" is up-to-date. It's called "reading".

That's not the same as saying I believe in the news I read, nor that my opinions are the same as the ones portrayed in those said news.

I actually have the opinion that this will only escalate into conflict if Iran does a diplomatic mistake. I don't war-monger, I have an opinion of my own, which apparently it's an offense to you.


In the vain HOPE that this site wouldn't have turned into GLP. Guess my wish has failed!


You realize that you are posting under the "World War 3" forum, right?

I mean, your attitude is the same as going into a pornographic movie set and yell: "HEY! Those people are having sex!!".



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 09:55 AM
link   
reply to post by Jimbowsk
 


I was thinking the same thing



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 05:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 





Dangerously close? Wow.... We don't want to fear monger one bit do we??

Exactly right!!! Top World Powers War ships in the gulf US subs Russian subs Chinese subs. Carriers and flight Ops.
Troop movements into the region.

Tell me? Exactly who needs the imagination of Fear Mongering?

One fart and somebody's gonna draw down....... no fear mongering intended
edit on 31-1-2012 by rebellender because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 11:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Hellas
 

I thought this might add something, but the Russians definitely do have Warships in the neighborhood. It appears just about every blue water naval power is in that neighborhood, as a matter of fact. I hadn't even thought about this until your post asking about Russians, but....


A new Russian naval task force has arrived in the Gulf of Aden to join the international efforts to fight piracy off the Somali coast, a spokesman for the Russian Pacific Fleet said.

The task force includes Udaloy class destroyer Admiral Tributs, the Pechenega tanker and a rescue tugboat. It replaces another Pacific Fleet’s task force led by Udaloy class destroyer Admiral Panteleyev, which has operated in the area since September last year.
Source

Looks like busy waters all the way around, and now that it comes up...I suppose the piracy never really has slowed down either.





new topics




 
7
<< 1   >>

log in

join